I'm am considering dropping the damage of all melee weapons by 1 dice level (ie a 1d8 becomes 1d6). Then adding (StrMod)d3's to all melee. So a Longsword from a medium character with +2 Str would become 1d6+2d3. The additional damage from the D3's cannot be added with any precision damage.
The reason I am considering this is because STR seems underrated to the point that I've run campaigns were I had no PC's with a STR higher than 12 at lvl 1. Melee also tends to die off after 7 or so. So this would make melee and STR stronger into later levels. I have personally felt they needed a little buff. Is this too much? Is this balanced? Any thoughts (expect yes or no without any reasoning) would be appreciated.
I think that weakens the strength stat. I suspect your running campaigns where no pc with a strength higher than 12 exists because your players aren't big fans of strength martial classes. Thats not really that big a deal.
|
OP, you may be underestimating just how high strength bonuses can get. For example, my 17th lvl Ironfang Invasion Shaman has 24 strength (+7 bonus), and the Bard/Dragon Disciple that I played as my first Pathfinder character got up to about +10.
A decent built martial is doing 100+ damage per round at 8-10th level, and you want to increase it? your players must not understand feat optimization.
we actually had to ban fighters and archers because they were killing the bad guy before the rest of the party could react, your suggestion would have made it worse.
The reason I am considering this is because STR seems underrated to the point that I've run campaigns were I had no PC's with a STR higher than 12 at lvl 1. Melee also tends to die off after 7 or so. So this would make melee and STR stronger into later levels. I have personally felt they needed a little buff.
What level range are you targeting? Because at level 1 Str based PCs can potentially one-shot a creature per round, if most character options are spent on the purpose (ability score points, race choice in favor of +2 Str, money for two-handed weapon, no shield etc.). And at high levels damage scales faster than monster HP, thanks to more attacks multiplied with higher crit chance multiplied with more damage per hit. Maybe multiplied with higher accuracy - that would be improvement by the power of four.
Beyond that, I would not assist my players to get comfy in the "doing damage is enough" corner. It's good if they look for something else to complement it, like rider effects from crits or from Power Attack (and its siblings). Or pick up Dazzling Display. Or do a combat maneuver where it fits. Or become tactical with increased reach and Stand Still / Pin Down. And so on.
Personally, I like to throw according NPCs at them so they can notice additional options.
A decent built martial is doing 100+ damage per round at 8-10th level, and you want to increase it? your players must not understand feat optimization.
we actually had to ban fighters and archers because they were killing the bad guy before the rest of the party could react, your suggestion would have made it worse.
Decent or Munchkin-ed? My players prefer fun over min/maxed. You are not doing 100+ a rnd as a martial at lvl 8-10 without greatly limiting your options. You have to take take a two handed crits on 18 weapon, and build it to crit on 15, and add Power Attack. What if flavor wise they want to run a Khopesh or Dwarven Warhammer? What if flavor wise they want burn 3 feats and have a full animal companion instead?
P, you may be underestimating just how high strength bonuses can get. For example, my 17th lvl Ironfang Invasion Shaman has 24 strength (+7 bonus), and the Bard/Dragon Disciple that I played as my first Pathfinder character got up to about +10.
If you're one handed thats 7-10 extra damage at end game when enemies are 200+ hp, thats not much. If give up the extra shield AC and go two handed that's 10-15 per hit. What I'm proposing at 7-10d3's would average 14-20. With the minus 1 average from the smaller die size of the main weapon. The increase isn't much over two handed. But would make one handed viable at end game (which it currently isn't for a pure strength build).
Uh....yeah you can...without being particularly munchkin.
A halforc who stacks strength at the rate other classes stack mainstat + a falchion + being crit focused because that or vital strike is the generic secondary choice for 2handers + being a barbarian...or bloodrager...or two hander fighter.
18 str to start +4
20 str from levels +5
+4 from belt/bulls strength +7
+4 from rage +9
+2 from enlarge person +10
X1.5 +15
+2 from weapon +17
+2 from bard/heroism/generic buff +19
Crit X2 +38
Passive non dice damage...with a falchion its ~58 damage per crit.
Edit: FYI under your system thats either 10d3 * 1.5 or 15d3 You mention it doesnt stack with precision damage, which nerfs slayer. Nerfs a number of swashbuckler builds. How does it interact with crits?
When i called it a nerf i read it as "treated as precision damage" meaning it doesn't double in a crit.
Either way, your players not building to a fighting styles potential isn't really an issue with that fighting style.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah my first question here is: "What problem are you trying to solve?"
Why is it a problem if nobody uses Strength as their main stat?
|
|
If you're one handed thats 7-10 extra damage at end game when enemies are 200+ hp, thats not much. If give up the extra shield AC and go two handed that's 10-15 per hit. What I'm proposing at 7-10d3's would average 14-20. With the minus 1 average from the smaller die size of the main weapon. The increase isn't much over two handed. But would make one handed viable at end game (which it currently isn't for a pure strength build).
I play classes with some sort of spellcasting, which needs a hand free, so shields are out. My character is either using a reach weapon or going into melee with mirror images up.
If your goal is to improve singleton style, There are better ways to do it than messing with a structural aspect of the way the game is.
Make a feat, make it similar to Shifter's Edge Tweak the requirements and the benefits til you get it where you want it. Things like only works with a one handed weapon. Play with the damage bonus til you get it where you think it should be.
A decent built martial is doing 100+ damage per round at 8-10th level, and you want to increase it? your players must not understand feat optimization.
we actually had to ban fighters and archers because they were killing the bad guy before the rest of the party could react, your suggestion would have made it worse.
Decent or Munchkin-ed? My players prefer fun over min/maxed. You are not doing 100+ a rnd as a martial at lvl 8-10 without greatly limiting your options. You have to take take a two handed crits on 18 weapon, and build it to crit on 15, and add Power Attack. What if flavor wise they want to run a Khopesh or Dwarven Warhammer? What if flavor wise they want burn 3 feats and have a full animal companion instead?
P, you may be underestimating just how high strength bonuses can get. For example, my 17th lvl Ironfang Invasion Shaman has 24 strength (+7 bonus), and the Bard/Dragon Disciple that I played as my first Pathfinder character got up to about +10.If you're one handed thats 7-10 extra damage at end game when enemies are 200+ hp, thats not much. If give up the extra shield AC and go two handed that's 10-15 per hit. What I'm proposing at 7-10d3's would average 14-20. With the minus 1 average from the smaller die size of the main weapon. The increase isn't much over two handed. But would make one handed viable at end game (which it currently isn't for a pure strength build).
No, I mean a decent build, not a munchkin. even a flavorful decent build STR build martial should be doing about 100 points of damage per round. if your players aren't willing to build to a characters strengths, then you really shouldn't rework the rules to give them a crutch.
for what it's worth, a munchkin build should be coming close to 200 points of damage per round around 10th level.
100 is definitely overkill.
50 wouldn't be hard though.
100 is definitely overkill.
50 wouldn't be hard though.
I got to well over 50 on a crit without power attack, or weapon specialization
I got to well over 50 on a crit without power attack, or weapon specialization100 is definitely overkill.
50 wouldn't be hard though.
I mean, my 10th level Bloodrager in Iron Gods does ...
... ~111DPR on average .
I'm under no illusions that this is "average" or "necessary", or even "decent" - those numbers are obscene! Also he has an AC of 15 while raging, which is obscenely bad =P
You should be perfectly happy and competetive in the average game with ~50DPR at level 10. If you're doing something other than dealing damage then you can afford less than that.
|
So I just looked at the npc codex level 8 fighter. It's an exceptionally terrible build, a gnome with a crossbow, and using the elite spread of 15 14 13 12 10 8 for stats. She gets 3 attacks dealing 2d6+10, for an average of 51 damage per round. Throw in some common buffs, say haste and bard song (+2 at that level), and she's doing 76 per round. And that's a !@$#@ build. She's not even adding a stat to damage, it's all just a magic weapon, weapon specialization, and deadly aim.
In comparison my PC for Ruins of Azlant (an optimized str based martial), at level 8, did an average of 136.
That's assuming 100% hits. Not every attack will hit (even against my AC:15 Bloodrager).
Also how is a Gnome dealing 2d6+10 damage with a - presumably small sized - crossbow?
Deadly aim, Weapon specialization, Point blank shot and a +1 weapon gets us the +10, but where's the extra 1d6 coming from?
(Sorry if this is derailing the thread)
The other d6 is from the +1 frost bolts she carries. She has 8 of them. Cold damage obviously.
The reason I am considering this is because STR seems underrated...
I think that's the burr in the blanket for me; your reason doesn't seem to match up with your action.
When you're hacking the game, always go for the smallest change you can. Don't revise a core rule when you could make a new class. Don't make a new class when you could change a feat. Etc.
If I had to guess, this seems more an issue with encounter design than the game's base mechanics.
|
|
Also how is a Gnome dealing 2d6+10 damage with a - presumably small sized - crossbow?
Deadly aim, Weapon specialization, Point blank shot and a +1 weapon gets us the +10, but where's the extra 1d6 coming from?
(Sorry if this is derailing the thread)
I suppose it'd be +11 counting pb, there's another +1 from fighter weapon training. and yeah, the extra d6 is from frost. npc codex fighters
I was counting damage in average if all attacks hit as that's how paizo counts it on their monster creation table in the bestiary.
Oh derp I totally forgot about weapon training =P
Alright, using those stats and plugging them into an actual DPR calculator we get:
~23 DPR.
~29 DPR with the Frost arrows.
~35 DPR with the Haste potion.
~45 DPR with the Frost arrows and the Haste potion.
The reason for this is they're only hitting the average CR:8 enemy about 50% of the time (the frost arrows are a terribly expensive way of dealing damage for someone who misses so often).
I got the average CR:8 enemy AC from HERE.
So in terms of damage numbers that's what I was referring to. You should be better than that gnome, but you don't need to be at 100 DPR to be an effective character.
10th level Half-elf, unchained rogue, knife master, two-weapon fighting build with kukri. Boots of speed, plus invisibility item
5 attacks per round at 1d4+8 plus 5d8 (rerolling 1s) roughly 160 dmg/round on average
IMO there's nothing munchkin about that build , just a typical rogue
10th level Half-elf, unchained rogue, knife master, two-weapon fighting build with kukri. Boots of speed, plus invisibility item
5 attacks per round at 1d4+8 plus 5d8 (rerolling 1s) roughly 160 dmg/round on average
IMO there's nothing munchkin about that build , just a typical rogue
TLDR: Rogues are a high damage class, and your damage should be more like ~125 DPR (best case). I worked it out to ~79 DPR on average, which is still great.
EDIT: I should clarify, that's ~125 DPR when you can get a full attack while flanking (which is amazing), and more like ~79 DPR as an actual average when you have to move to flank every 2nd round (which is still amazing).
Assuming you start with 18 DEX and by level 10 you've up'd it to 20 and you have a +4 belt. That's 24 DEX for a +7 modifier. Now let's say you have TWF, ITWF, Double Slice and Weapon Focus. We'll say +2 for flanking and finally let's say you have a pair of +2 Kukris (oh and the boots of Haste).
That gets you to +18/+18/+18/+13/+13 - 1d4+9(+25 sneak attack)
I'm not ginna give you Greater Invisibility for your "agerage DPR", but I did include a +2 flanking bonus.
Once again - using THE SAME TABLE for enemy AC we plug that into our calculations and get ... ~124 DPR.
Now that's higher than my Bloodrager . But it's also something you can only do for 10 rounds per day without help (haste) and can't do at all without a flanking buddy.
Also (this'll be a first on these boards) the Rogue is a high damage dealing character. For all the guff it gets on this forum the Rogue is very capable of dealing damage when the circumstances are right. The problem people have with the Rogue is that it's hard to set up the cidcumstances so that you CAN get that full-attack sneak attack. You basically one-shot this enemy (average CR:10 enemy has ~130hp, so we'll give it to you), but next round you have to move to find another. So the next round you move and attack for +20 1d4+9 (+25 sneak attack) = ~32.5 Damage on that round.
If you swap between "full attack" and "move and attack" every round you end up with an average of ~79 DPR for the entire fight, which is probably a more accurate number for your Rogue.
Now don't get me wrong, that's some good damage. As I said above an average DPR of 50 is totally fine for a primary damage dealer, so getting 60% higher than the target is amazing!
Just don't think you have to be dealing 100 damage per round to be relevant.
Note that DPR isn't the damage if all attacks hit; it's the expected damage, taking into account to-hit chances and potential critical hits.
Oh yeah maybe if I'd explained what I was talking a out it would be easier =P
Ok so my DPR calculation for the Rogue was:
(0.6×(11.5+25))+(0.15×0.25×(11.5+25))+(0.15×0.75×(23+25)) ×3
(0.35×(11.5+25))+(0.15×0.5×(11.5+25))+(0.15×0.5×(23+25)) ×2
= 124.23125 (~124 DPR)
(0.6×(11.5+25))
This is your chance to hit WITHOUT a critical threat (0.6) multiplied by the average damage on a non-critical hit (11.5+25).
(0.15×0.25×(11.5+25))
This is the chance to roll a critical threat (0.15) multiplied by the chance to MISS on the confirmation roll (0.25) multiplied by the average damage on a non-critical hit (11.5+25).
(0.15×0.75×(23+25))
This is the chance to roll a critical threat (0.15) multiplied by the chance to CONFIRM the crit (0.75) multiplied by the average damage on a critical hit (23+25).
The damage numbers are listed as "(X+25)" to show the sneak attack damage (25).
You get 3 attacks at your full bonus, then 2 attacks at -5 to hit.
Note that DPR isn't the damage if all attacks hit; it's the expected damage, taking into account to-hit chances and potential critical hits.Oh yeah maybe if I'd explained what I was talking a out it would be easier =P
Ok so my DPR calculation for the Rogue was:
(0.6×(11.5+25))+(0.15×0.25×(11.5+25))+(0.15×0.75×(23+25)) ×3
(0.35×(11.5+25))+(0.15×0.5×(11.5+25))+(0.15×0.5×(23+25)) ×2
= 124.23125 (~124 DPR)
** spoiler omitted **
the 0.6 is your chance to hit? Seems low considering the rogue should be flanking and going against touch AC. (and this is with only 2 magic items, more magic will increase this damage)
But my point stands, a decent built 10th level martial character should be doing around 100 damage per round.
Sorry if that wasn't clear.
The chance to hit is 0.75
The chance to crit is 0.15
0.6 is the chance to hit without scoring a critical threat.
0.75 - 0.15 = 0.6
So I could have written the equation like this (and probably should have):
((0.75-0.15)×(11.5+25))+(0.15×0.25×(11.5+25))+(0.15×0.75×(23+25))
(And in case people aren't used to this notation, 0.75 means a 75% chance to hit.)
So you're hitting on a 6+ (which is pretty good for a 3/4 BAB character with no accuracy boosts who is voluntarily taking penalties for TWF) and critting on an 18+. That was against the AC of the average CR:10 enemy (who has an AC of 24), and yes I did include the Flanking bonus.
I think you meant Flat-Footed AC, not Touch AC, and no I ignored that. Greater Invisibility is a 4th level spell and really too expensive to count toward your "average DPR" on a class without access to spells. In a boss fight it's totally worth it, but even then you either need a friendly caster or to invest in scrolls and UMD (which would not be a bad investment). If you had some other reliable way of targeting Flat-footed AC (or Touch AC I guess) then I'm open to it.
0.75
This is your chance to hit.
(11.5+25)
This is your average damage.
0.15
This is your chance of scoring a critical threat.
(0.15×0.25×(11.5+25))+(0.15×0.75×(23+25))
All of this covers what happens when you score a critical threat. This is broken down further into two big sections:
(0.15×0.25×(11.5+25))
This is when you score a critical threat but miss the confirm.
(0.15×0.75×(23+25))
This is when you score a critical threat and confirm the crit.
So if we break the critical threats down further:
0.150.15
These are showing the chance that you scored a critical threat. These numbers always match each other, and the number subtracted from the first bracket (in italics).
0.250.75
These two numbers are the chance that you miss or confirm the crit, and they always add up to 1. The number to confirm the crit usually matches your "to-hit" chance in the first bracket (in italics), but feats like Critical Focus can change this.
(11.5+25)
This is the damage you'd deal if you get a critical threat but don't confirm. In most cases this will be identical to the damage on a normal hit (in italics in the first bracket).
(23+25)
This is the average damage on a confirmed critical hit. Usually this would be double/tripple/quadruple the regular damage, but since there' sneak attack involved it changes things.
Any more questions feel free to ask.
I listed the character as having a ring of invisibility, well within reason for a 10th level character. Yes I did mean Flat-footed, not touch, my error there. Also a 10th level ninja can use Greater invisible as a class ability, so it's not far fetched to consider it. There are also a couple of rogue tricks that will cause your opponent to be flat-footed (I'll agree they are situational and not reliable)
As for other 10th level builds, a two handed fighter could be getting 3 attacks/round at 2d8+27 (+34 on the second and third hit), so again into that 100 damage range
An archer build should be at 4 or 5 attacks, at roughly 1d8+15 so again close to 100.
my point is, 10th level non casters should be able to deal close to 100 points per round, and with that in mind, this proposed change to bonus damage due to STR is not necessary, and potentially overpowered.
Well a Ring of Invisibility gives at-will Invisibility as a standard action, but it doesn't give Greater Invisibility, so it's only good for a single attack (I will check out the Ninja though, coz that's a nice trick).
The point isn't that you CAN'T do that much damage, the point is that you don't need to. As I said above my Bloodrager Remus can easily do over 100 DPR when buffed (and he can buff himself), but that much offensive power comes at a cost - his defences are god-awful. Remus has ~15 AC , so he ends most fights by healing ~100hp, which is expensive and dangerous .
The other thing I was trying to explain is how to measure DPR. A fighter getting 5 attacks with a bow at ~20 damage each is great, but unless they can guarantee a 100% hit-rate they're not doing 100 DPR. That archer is probably more like ~70 DPR, and that Two-Handed-Weapon Fighter is probably more like ~75 DPR (it's also worth noting that the archer can full-attack every round so that's a really reliable number, while the THW-Fighter will probably have to move, at least in the first round).
Having said that ...
my point is, 10th level non casters should be able to deal close to 100 points per round, and with that in mind, this proposed change to bonus damage due to STR is not necessary, and potentially overpowered.
You're absolutely correct here.
My main thought is: "Who cares if they're not using high strength characters?" But I guess if you do care ...
My assumption is that the OP is trying to encourage them to try something new, so buffing it a bit (even if it doesn't need the buff) is more about making it more appealing than about balance.
To the OP, chances are your players perfer defensive and utility abilities over raw damage or they'd already be playing high strength characters, so rather than adding damage maybe try adding utility.
Maybe let characters add Strength to Acrobatocs, Escape Artist and Intimidate if they prefer (don't take these away from DEX/CHA, just let the player use either). You could even do Handle Animal and Ride, and you could let them use STR for Disable Device with the proviso that if they fail they've ruined the lock. You could let them use STR instead of CON for their fort-saves if it's higher (not likely a huge buff, but a buff non-the-less).
Look at more utility options for Strength rather than boosting damage, as this is probably the main reason it's not being picked.
|
|
One possibility is to replace Climb, Swim and Acrobatics (jumping) with Athletics (a strength based skill). This is from the Pathfinder Unchained Consolidated Skills Optional Rules.
That's a pretty good list.
I got rid of Climb, Fly, Ride and Swim and added Athletics; use Acrobatics for physical feats of deftness and agility, Athletics for those involving strength or stamina.
In my games, they're often the two commonly taken skills, right up there with Perception. There's always some ledge to scramble across or some lake to dive into, and there's some kind of time-time-sensitive issue (like the princess's illness or a marauding dragon) that makes standing around for a couple turns casting Spider Climb and busting out the pitons and rock hammers less ideal.